Starship | SN9 | High-Altitude Flight Test

Birt 2 feb 2021
On Tuesday, February 2, Starship serial number 9 (SN9) completed SpaceX’s second high-altitude flight test of a Starship prototype from our site in Cameron County, Texas.
Similar to the high-altitude flight test of Starship serial number 8 (SN8), SN9 was powered through ascent by three Raptor engines, each shutting down in sequence prior to the vehicle reaching apogee - approximately 10 kilometers in altitude. SN9 successfully performed a propellant transition to the internal header tanks, which hold landing propellant, before reorienting itself for reentry and a controlled aerodynamic descent.
The Starship prototype descended under active aerodynamic control, accomplished by independent movement of two forward and two aft flaps on the vehicle. All four flaps are actuated by an onboard flight computer to control Starship’s attitude during flight and enable precise landing at the intended location. During the landing flip maneuver, one of the Raptor engines did not relight and caused SN9 to land at high speed and experience a RUD.
These test flights are all about improving our understanding and development of a fully reusable transportation system designed to carry both crew and cargo on long-duration, interplanetary flights and help humanity return to the Moon, and travel to Mars and beyond.

Ummæli

  • Judging by the first test, you need more distance to brake the weight is heavier than during takeoff.

  • The third test is still the main one, you don't want to crash. Firstly, they are weak maneuverable, they do not hold in an upright position for a long time. Secondly, when landing on a horizontal position, three engines must work to reach the initial state of the thrust weight during landing. In the third, to reduce the weight of gravity, go earlier to the landing position.

  • F

  • Sn10 you got this!!!!

  • your design wont land safely.. the bottom design has to go

    • What bottom design?

  • Hey guys why don't you use a 3D gyroscope PS; I didn't get enough sleep last night.

  • SpaceX make our History

  • If there was life on Mars wouldn’t there be remains even footprints or something. Couldn’t you equip the drone with thermal imaging and make it so that it can scan the inside of the planet like we have on earth now for the oceans and stuff?!

    • @Chitrak Aseri And if there was life it would most probably not be multicellular, so no Footprints

    • Even if there was life on mars it was billions of years ago, how can footprints stay there all the time

  • 5:29 to 5:43 all of a sudden the noise of starship scared the hell out of me 😂

  • The sound (⊙_◎) is scaring me

  • Maybe time to scrap the idea of flying grain silos.

  • We're there people in that?????

    • Yes there was, 20 people sadly died in this *PROTOTYPE TEST* there was no one inside its a TEST.

    • No

  • The SN9 is dead, long live the SN10!

  • Space x winner blue origin looser

  • 2021: SpaceX Crashes another Starship. 2021: Still wondering what Blue Origin is planning.

  • Musk said these rockets are meant to fail.

  • U can do it space X!!! U CAN DO IT!!!!!!

    • esfuerzo sea mayor y con eso reimpulsar la devolucion en posicion vertical. ejemplo spin de un avion para retomar el control. solo ideas... si les sirven saludos.

  • A altitude que ele tentou pousar foi muito baixa para seu peso por isso ele não conseguiu pousar tenho certeza se foce mais alto o preparo para o pouso ele pousaria normalmente

  • Зачем садить на твёрдую поверхность? Надо исследовать мягкие. Как нож сквозь масло

  • You are going make it, keep up the good work!

  • People will die because your incompetence. You have no working engine (it's main designer just left the company!), overweight vehicle and obviously you don't know what is wrong with your own hardware... Soyuz 1 in making.

    • This is why you test. The first planes crashed

  • Can we create a giant magnifying glass to amplify sunlight towards Mars?

  • was there pilots ?

  • *Shot on iPhone* by Linda H.

  • Try try again

  • Hmm yes pointy end up flamey end down I concur.

  • the horizon 👀

  • é totalmente incorrecto lançar humanos a partir da superfície terrestre, pois a gravidade atrapalha a partida e consome muito alem de que pode ser muito perigoso. Seria ideal primeiramente a construção de uma nave estacionaria, (normalmente naves de grande porte, não entram ou saem de planetas, elas são pontes de acesso a eles e vice versa), localizada fora da terra assim como a estação espacial e a partir dai entao, construir-se astronave menores que partissem a partir dela em diante, o que não iria consumir tanto combustivel pela partida e bem menos perigoso e seria mais pratica a transferencia de materiais e equipamentos e a transição de pessoas humanas, alem de que, se caso precisasse, resgates mais rapidos e precisos. Ancoragens e motores propulsores não entram em contato com naves de grande porte. Funciona igual a barcos em mares e portos. Precisam raciocinar mais logicamente. Isso é muito facil fazer. rsrsrs ah outra coisa rsrsrsr, Possiveis astronautas, devem ser neutros, ou seja, não devem ter nenhum vinculos humanos e que não sejam capazes e não terem saudades de ninguem da terra, é uma viajem de ida. Outra seria importante que todos os astronautas tivessem o mesmo grupo sanguineo capaz de, que se precisar, doar e receber sem problemas. rsrsrsrs. StarShip é bem ilogico, talvez em muitos anos se aprimore tal utilidade de subida e descida, mas as mesmas propulsões a foguetes não devem ser usadas para descidas em nenhuma parte pois são explosivas. podem ser usadas para subidas mas não para descidas. rsrsrsrs

  • Do another recap video of sn9!! The one with sn8 gave me chills!!

  • What about a backup chute ? With cbon seperation incase the engine fails on landing, anyhoo.

    • also SS is not meant for just landing on Earth, it will land on Moon, Mars and maybe elsewhere. Those conditions doesn't support parachute landings, over there only propulsive landing works

    • @sehhi vooty Это Не государственная организация. Also parachute takes a bit too deploy, starship weighs a lot(would need several huge parachutes), and it would be easier to increase reliability of engines.

    • вот так деньги налогоплательщиков и хоронят.. а лохи пусть и дальше платят.. это же святая миссия человечества (нах бы это надо было бы..)

  • el diametro del cilindro, dista mucho el centro de gravedad, al estar todo los motores juntos la temperatura aumenta peligrosamente en los mecanismos moviles, deberian distanciar los motores al perímetro y dejar el motor de control independiente al medio solo para estabilización con eso podrían tener un tiempo de ventilación mayor y un respaldo al momento de frenar y dejar acostado el cohete, deberian pensar en un giro en el eje vertical al momento de girar para liberar la energia cinetica en el caso que el esfuerzo sea mayor y con eso reimpulsar la devolucion en posicion vertical. ejemplo spin de un avion para retomar el control. solo ideas... si les sirven saludos.

  • What matters is that Starship is the first one , which is always the most difficult one , the one that really matters for Humanity , the first one going up & coming down.

  • Great test, i hope you learned a lot. The government (FAA) gertting this close to a private company, as if they had anything to say on what they are doing is so wrong!

    • It not wrong. Same thing as police getting close to citizens. The government has laws that need to be followed, both by private organizations and citizens.

  • It is important to note that suddenly, and against all probability, a starship had been called into existence, several miles above the surface of an alien planet

  • @elonmusk you guys should take trees to grow in mars all over it

    • Funny you should say that. Elon's original plan for SpaceX was just to send a small greenhouse to Mars and grow things in it as a stunt to get more support for NASA.

  • Sorry not a starship..that's still just a fancier bottle rocket

  • DC-X did this 28 years ago, but successfully.

    • DC-X did nothing like this. DC-X's 'swandive' was a brief sideways jaunt under power, that at no point was fully perpendicular to the airstream. SN9 performed an unpowered sideways freefall, controlled using only aerodynamics, and then attempted to relight it's engines and return to vertical. One of which did start, and SN8 was 2 for 2. DC-X at no point in it's testing performed a midair relight or freefall; it's engines always ran for full duration. It's also worth noting that DC-X was far smaller, didn't go nearly as high, or stay airborne for nearly as long, and had far simpler engines (expander vs FFSC).

    • It did a bellyflop?

  • I'm just so happy that we have someone who is perfecting this technology! SpaceX will crash more rockets than everyone to have rockets that perform better than anyone's.

  • you can start to record from origin of the solar system, wasted so much time.

  • 7.5° 20 ft rampart?

  • Anytime some amazing updates are done on these vehicles, unless you want a landing ignition that wants to be called "master-landing-flip-no-altitude", this new bird that wants a such angle attack optimizes the rudders in weightlessness accelerometers of the (fuel-axis-force) in the turbines so that the vertical landing, inversely of time equal to the vertical-ignition- reaction and take-off, is activated in the famous starlink-cargo 4in1 self-guiding landing altitude of the mixture itself, so the mixture drop avoids. Remember who cares about a bird's shadow outside of itselves that only a true navigator operates with their eyes closed, whatever the first flights, the most beautiful are inevitably future, great success to all , which are on the way ...

    • @yasio bolo What's special about the F-22's take-off and landing technology? AFAIK it's fundamentally no different than aircraft from a century ago. Also, even if fitted with rocket engines, it still has an abysmal mass ratio. It would struggle just to make the Karmen line, let alone orbit.

    • Excuse me Elon Musk, but there is already the take-off and landing technology of the F 22 raptors, if they get bigger and adapt with oxygen engines you will have a modern an

  • would be awesome if we could get telemetry

  • Mesmerizing work. What's a good news source to keep up with space exploration related progress?

  • I am sorry but I little bit chuckled but in good way and then I made face impression that am with him. It is really nice he is trying hard, these things but same time it is really silly.. Talking about mars and living there and playing GOD just becuse an american has tons of money.. It, it is just silly for me, if I have to be honest. Why on EARTH someone would wanna go on mars and live there??? That is ABSOLUTELY NOT habitable for humans ! There is no oxygen, different atmosphere different pressure far away from the sun.. aaagrrhh... I know .. I know it would be fantastic.. but. No .. we can't .. We didn't created the universe and its suns/stars and planets in it... It is just not ours.. We are just poor humans.. I think elon musk living his dream ...

    • @Fink Humans will never create any atmosphere ..Humans will create metal machines .. And machine robotic world.. Artifical robo-electronic planet and create robo-humans trying to bond it with human's mind.. where no oxygen would be necessary so no breathing willbe needed and to withstand -300 degrees of Celsius to fully keep working.. Or +1000 degrees of celsius. Depend of the metal used to create robo-human. Titanium melts at 1600 C or Tungsten melts at 3400°C

    • @Aorus Mini-ITX RiG With the current atmosphere yes, but if we are able to create a denser atmosphere there very well could Liquid water.

    • @Fink Why it wouldn't be life somewhere else same like here ? The water is everywhere in universe in crystal form so solid state, falling on the planets, but it depends of the temperature of the sun and planet and its atmosphere how it will handle and keep it in liquid state. For mars there could be water inside as mars core melted water but once water reached surface it just gone vaporized as during day there can be 100C degrees Celsius and during night -100 . We are not 100% sure that those lines on mars were made by water.. It could be cores lava in early stages.. In mars poles you will see ice as it is water in solid where is always -200 or even more degrees of Celsius.. It is basically impossible to keep water element liquid on mars it will either vaporize during day and during night freeze to ''death'' 🙂

    • @Aorus Mini-ITX RiG Earth has the exact proportions for Life as we know it, you can’t know if there is other life out there. Also, Mars had flowing water, why couldn’t there have been life? There also is a lot of CO2, which plant based life on earth use. Who says we can’t melt the Mars ice again?

    • @Fink I know, but on mars there is no possible to create ignition due to oxygen , hydrogen , not present in mars atmosphere. There are billions other planets in our galaxy where the life is present! But we are about to discover once webb telescope will be launched and deployed! Which I am fan of and admire. On mars there is no life becuse there was missing the RIGHT amount of the elements and properties to nature to work ! The earth has the EXACT proportions to deploy ''life-stream'' to get working. Life in universe is something extraordinary, something magical , yet for us it is normal, we are born in IN it. For creating life on an planet you need basic properties: 1.Energy, not too much and not too low, just right enough. That means planet needs to be positioned in exact distance from the star. 2.you need heavy elements , carbon ,oxygen ,sulfur and other chemicals. and 3. Mainly Liquid so water to mix chemicals and bond atoms and mix together. On mars there will be ice forever becuse not right amount of heat from the sun. can defrost it.. Don't go always with wiki as it is not right on 100% It is good site but there are other sites specific ones . I read about mars here : airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/exploring-the-planets/online/solar-system/mars/surface/volcanoes/#:~:text=Mars%20today%20has%20no%20active,and%20piles%20of%20thick%20ash. And if you want to know about life more watch this : I loved these episodes perfectly made.. ischats.info/fun/g7ienZOEkl2FnHg/v-deo ischats.info/fun/hMt9ipKrmqCghIA/v-deo You will have more better imagination what life is... What all needs to be done and Pandora's box is open.....

  • вот так деньги налогоплательщиков и хоронят.. а лохи пусть и дальше платят.. это же святая миссия человечества (нах бы это надо было бы..)

    • Somebody posted this exact sentence after you. They either copied you or your bots. @sehhi vooty posted it

  • 💓💓💓

  • "와"

  • hahaha lool 'Landing'

  • So why do they have to do all this testing for high altitude when we supposedly have been in space several times?

    • This was about testing the landing, not reaching high altitude. The high altitude was just a byproduct of needed enough room to fall back down and properly test it. This type of landing has never been tried before. There's not much point sending the ships higher and faster if they can't even do a basic landing yet.

    • Because this uses different methods and technology never tried before

  • giant waste of money Get reked Elon.

    • It has been a successful test, so money well invested

    • Sneed

    • Planes and cars are also a waste of money

  • hello Elon, I may have found a different way of traveling between stars and the known technologies, spacex rocket models, I hope you can take my stitches into consideration, so I am writing to you. because you have everything to make these ideas come true. I would like to say this for a start. Have you ever thought? Allegedly sighted spacecraft ufo are always in circle shape? We can start with the answer to this question. I just want you to listen to give me a chance Maybe we can reach beyond everything known until now, together we may have taken the first steps to reach interstellar galaxies from the earth ... Or will be full of my ideas with me ... I'll wait, hoping to see you.

  • Вообще то был Знак - Как всё закончится .. (запуск можно было перенести).

  • So sad try again better next time

    • well, this went better than sn8 in so many things

  • We can manage to have a elevator or tunnel from earth to moon only 3.8 lakh km we have to build it up having rest stations in it . #elonmusk

    • Pol Valls its means pipe like structure

    • @Pushpraj Singh tunnel on what? there is nothing to tunnel :(

    • Pol Valls yes ryt but we can make a elevated tunnel like that revolution or movement don’t affect .

    • but earth rotates faster than moon orbits

  • SN10: Hold my beer.

  • hi Space x, i think some parachute or a new engine (4x more powerful) could solve the landing problem :) yes we can Mars

    • ​@Pascal Fokx SpaceX have landed 74 Falcon boosters from space. They know how to run the math for these kind of landings. But since you seem to think that a team of some of the brightest engineers on the planet could have made a basic calculation error, let's check: The ship weighs ~120 tonnes. One engine can produce up to 200 tonnes of thrust, which gives an acceleration of ~16.7m/s^2, or ~7m/s^2 when subtracting gravity. That allows it to decelerate from it's terminal velocity of ~70m/s in around 10 seconds and 350 meters. Since the flip was initiated at 550 meters, that seems quite reasonable. So even one engine with the current thrust is sufficient to land it, provided it can complete the flip, which requires two engines. Two engines is more than enough; almost too much. They can accelerate the ship at ~23.5m/s^2 when subtracting gravity, enough to stop the ship in 3 seconds and ~100m. 3 seconds instead of 10 gives a lot less time to correct for any mistakes, and 100m instead of 350m means flipping a lot closer to the ground. But what you're proposing is that the engines should be four times as powerful. So 800 tonnes of thrust to land a 120 tonne ship. That's an acceleration of 66.7m/s, or 56.9m/s after subtracting gravity. This reduces the landing time to 1.2 seconds, and distance to just 43 meters, less than the ship's own height, making the margin for error incredibly small and requiring a flip very close to the ground. To make matters worse, the ship will no longer be capable of hovering to make corrections. It has to land perfectly on the first try or not at all. The engines have a minimum 40% throttle. So a single engine can go as low as 80 tonnes of thrust. At 60% it will make 120 tonnes, just right to hover. Two engines have a combined minimum thrust of 160 tonnes, too much to hover, which is why SpaceX plan to shut one down partway through the landing and finish on just one. However, if a single engine was four times more powerful, it would have a minimum thrust of 320 tonnes, far, far too much to hover a 120 tonne ship. Even at minimum thrust, the ship will only slow to appropriate landing speed for about a tenth of a second. After that, it will launch upwards faster than a hypercar does horizontally. So like I already said, the current engines are powerful enough. Making them four times more powerful would make a landing near impossible.

    • @Pascal Fokx dude, one of the engines that was supposed to turn on, didnt turn on. thats engine failure. also, this vehicle is way too heavy for chutes. It would snap in half

    • hi may be it's just a calculation error , bcs gravity on Earth is added to SN9 return speed, the engine must be powerful anough to reverse the landing speed i think :)

    • These engines are more than powerful enough. They're so powerful that they can't land with all three, and even two might be too much. The current plan is to use two for the flip and then shut one down and land on just a single engine. Using an engine 4 times more powerful would make landing hopelessly impossible.

    • the problem with engine was a restart and parachutes aren't reusable and not even equally useful for Mars and Earth

  • Excuse me Elon Musk, but there is already the take-off and landing technology of the F 22 raptors, if they get bigger and adapt with oxygen engines you will have a modern and excellent autonomous ship, or for example a hybrid between the plane that you yourself He proposed vertical take-off and that when it reaches the edge of the atmosphere it can turn on its oxygen engines. you have to be more practical.

    • What's special about the F-22's take-off and landing technology? AFAIK it's fundamentally no different than aircraft from a century ago. Also, even if fitted with rocket engines, it still has an abysmal mass ratio. It would struggle just to make the Karmen line, let alone orbit.

    • they are working on it

  • Disculpeme Elon Musk, pero ya existe la tecnologia de despegue y aterrizaje de los F 22 raptor, si se vuelven mas grandes y se adaptan con motores de oxigeno tendra una nave autonoma moderna y excelente, o por ejemplo un hibrido entre el avion que usted mismo propuso de despegue vertical y que cuando llegue al límite de la admosfera pueda prender sus motores de oxigeno. hay que ser mas practico.

    • algo así es mucho más difícil y caro de hacer que lo que estan haciendo ahora en SpaceX

  • Wish you all the best ❤️ from Bangladesh ❤️

  • I think spacex going to Mars will be a failure I don’t know why I’m saying that but I feel somehow it’s gonna fail hopefully I’m wrong

    • People said that planes will fail. Stay positive

    • yeah, but that first flight will be a test flight with minor important cargo and by then the flip maneuver will be easy-peasy to do on Earth

  • Spectacular fireball 😁 I really hope they get it right on SN10, because it's about time that IA learned it's descent speed and sticking a landing. Good luck Elon sir.

    • The AI performed very well. perfectly in fact. the fault was that one of the engines failed to turn on causing loss of control, and high speeds which resulted in a loss of the vehicle

    • maybe they are already using AI in a lot of works

  • That was close SpaceX. GG. ;o)

  • In thrust we trust😂😂

  • 5:28 your welcome

    • its 5 minutes. Not 1 hour.

  • I think they should change the orientation from belly flip to normal at a greater height.

    • no, that would mean less aerodynamic drag, and result in a waste of fuel. and also, if an engine fails to relight, your going to crash no matter what.

    • it needs to touch down at zero velocity, flipping early would either waste fuel or have it go back up.

    • But that still wouldn’t help if an engine failed to light

  • Yeah really got to work on that landing lol.

  • I am curious about the damage received by the second one. I'm sure some debris hit it.

  • Tip : 5mins of a rocket sat doing nothing doesn't make for a good video to share ... What's going on in the space x editing room ? Taken weeks to get a pretty poor video edit .

    • this was a live stream. it has 5 minutes so people have time to get to the stream and watch

    • it was live.

    • This was a live stream

  • 🎃Мне кажется надо сначала научить ракеты starship летать в космос, а потом стараться их посадить на землю. Как это происходило с ракетами falcon 9. Иначе застрянете и потеряете много времени🚀🚀🚀🚀

    • Why don't you just call it a crash instead of a "Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly", anyways keep trying spacex

  • Илон, вы гений! Скорее бы вы направили ракеты на марс. Я понимаю, что это в данный момент невозможно, но попробуйте сделать 2-ю пару сопла(для приземления на планету, которая не имеет притяжения). Попробуйте сделать совместный проект с Россией. Я уверен, что они вам помогут. Удачи вам!

    • Они это кто? Парни с лубянки?

  • press f to the people who put their volume very high

  • Its like Kerbals

  • Devam et space x🇹🇷

  • Shwoops

  • Cant wait to go to planet mars.,

  • SpaceX is awesome🔥 A company that never give up even fail multiple times

  • 5:25-Launch

  • Seems awfully risky to land it next to SN10

    • it seems so due to the perspective but it was really far away, look: ischats.info/fun/YM6NlaGrh5GJpms/v-deo

  • I love that they show this. More transparency means more trust from people. The government will never understand that.

    • The hell with the government i know our government in usa is hiding very big information in area 51 which is antimatter and real starships

    • Good nice video very much

  • Why don't you just call it a crash instead of a "Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly", anyways keep trying spacex

    • RUD is an old engineering euphemism. It predates SpaceX by at least 35 years, they're just keeping up the tradition.

    • RUD sounds much better

  • treelon husk

    • use a blanket retractable.than it won't mater if it vibrates saving weight just got to be strong with heat disapating caratistics.

  • 👏👏👍👍

  • Too much math and not enough feelings. You guys will keep failing until you get in touch with your inner selves and not only rely on numbers. A kid riding his first bike doesn't rely on numbers, it's his natural feelings that help him learn it.

    • @Awakened One Not true. In the early days of spaceflight that had pilots fly and computers. Computers always flew better, which is why all rockets are controlled autonomously.

    • that's just not how it works though.

    • @Brent Smith Math is a way to do things but for the controls to be more natural, they need to interface it with VR. It will give the pilot natural feelings for controlling the ship. And it'll be much easier. Obviously this will require a skilled pilot as most things do anyways

    • Recent mishap notwithstanding, SpaceX seem to have done just fine landing Falcon 9 using math instead of feelings.

  • great

  • if another one gonna also explode, I'll say they doing it on purpose, probably some kind of an insurance fraud :P

  • Why didn't SpaceX show us next to engines and next to flaps cameras like in SN8 flight all time?

  • Why does it look like it's going 10mph from the gas coming off?

    • ​@umlax45 Average ascent speed was around 90mph. Which is still pretty slow by rocket standards, but the reason it looks even slower is probably because your brain isn't comprehending it's size properly. i1.wp.com/spaceexplored.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2021/02/SN10_Rollout_Austin_002.jpeg?ssl=1 Even at 100mph, it takes over a second to travel it's own length.

    • @Brent Smith i get that part, i meant during the duration. 10mph is an exaggeration on my part, but doesn't it seem like it should be going faster?

    • If you're talking about when it was near the top of it's flight, that's probably because it was. They slow down to a near hover to burn off fuel at the top.

  • SN9: blows up Cleanup Crew: Bruh

  • Wow!!! I was not expecting that at the end. Impressed by calmness!

  • Guys. These are test flights. SpaceX expects them Starships to blow up. It's common practice in the air-space field. When you design a vehicle that flies with human beings on board, you want to prioritize safety. With all the proper calculations you get the vehicle's theoretical limits, which 99.9% times are correct. And then you proceed to test flights, intentionally breaking the limits to make sure your calculations are correct and people on board are safe. It would be worrying if a vehicle doesn't blow up breaking its limits, it would mean something is wrong in calculations and you would have to debug what.

  • Hi,

  • They should have someone manually land it. I bet tfue can land that thing

    • If you really think that, I imagine you are a super computer.

    • It crashed due to an engine failure. Manual control wouldn't have mattered, it can't land on only one working engine. Also, I highly doubt that you could land it even with working engines. The fuel and acceleration margins are too extreme for human reaction times. Starting a 2g deceleration burn a mere 1/20th of a second too late is the difference between landing perfectly and hitting the ground at 27mph/43kmh.

  • It my take a different way to make the heat shealed tilles to work a lip on one or more sides that will coveron top to let the tile slide with heat exspantion make them a triangle.or use a blanket retractable.than it won't mater if it vibrates saving weight just got to be strong with heat disapating caratistics.

  • Good nice video very much

  • In the last few seconds it screams: "I don't wanna die!"

  • I am certainly no rocket scientist but it looks like twice if they started the flip higher up they may have actually been able to attain level flight and a slowing down with the motors before impact at least. its hitting the ground way to fast to be anything but RUD.

    • Flipping higher would have made it crash faster

    • But it is a hell of a show either way. Nice work guys! I wish you every success!

  • Starship Sn9 Was Test On February 2 2021.

  • Could you use some form of water displacement tank system to land in, especially for the lower stage. Or would it still be like hitting concrete. I imagine like a large underground silo with a funneled entrance at the top. The rocket touches down into the water pushing the water it out but also the water is mechanically released at a controlled rate to slow the impact and fall of the rocket. until it's in 20-30m deep in the silo. Mechanically grabbing in mid-air sounds hard to repeat, the second it goes wrong the tower would be destroyed.

    • @Jack Whitlock From what I've read they are going to catch the super-heavy booster. Which sounds difficult to repeat, one miss, and there would have to be damage to infrastructure.

    • You could just do it the way SpaceX are

  • Boa noite , sou seu fa elon musk , queria ver pessoalmente ( rei do espaço )

  • why doesn't have a parachute?

    • +The mooin doesn't have an atmosphere, mars has a too thin atmosphere

    • It weighs too much